header-logo header-logo

07 February 2014
Issue: 7593 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

EU—Jurisdiction—Civil & commercial matters

Schmid v Hertel C-328/12 [2014] All ER (D) 221 (Jan)

Court of Justice of the European Union (First Chamber), 16 Jan 2014

Under Art 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC) 1346/2000 (on insolvency proceedings) (the Regulation), courts of the member state within the territory of which insolvency proceedings have been opened have jurisdiction to hear and determine an action to set a transaction aside by virtue of insolvency brought against a person whose place of residence is not within the territory of a member state.

The applicant was the liquidator of the debtor’s assets, appointed in insolvency proceedings in Germany in May 2007. The respondent resided in Switzerland. The applicant brought an action against the respondent before the German courts seeking to have a transaction set aside and to recover a sum of money plus interest as part of the debtor’s estate. The action was dismissed as inadmissible at first instance and on appeal on the ground that the German courts lacked international jurisdiction. The applicant appealed to the German Federal Court of Justice

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll